Friday, March 14, 2014

Black
Powder Discovered: A traveler at Grand Rapids (GRR) had a storage tube
in his carry-on bag containing four cubes each with 100 grains of black powder.
He stated that he uses the black powder for muzzle loading and forgot to remove
it from his bag. This is a good example of why it’s always important to double
check your bags prior to traveling.

Loaded Gun Discovered at (MIA)

35Firearms Discovered This Week
– Of the 35 firearms, 29 were loaded and 11 had rounds
chambered. See a complete list and more photos at the bottom of this post. (Updated on 3/20/14 to remove three duplicates)

Inert
Ordnance and Grenades etc.
- We continue to find inert hand grenades and other weaponry on a weekly basis.
Please keep in mind that if an item looks like a realistic bomb, grenade, mine,
etc., it is prohibited. When these items are found at a checkpoint or in
checked baggage, they can cause significant delays in checkpoint screening.
While they may be novelty items, you cannot bring them on a plane. Read
here on why inert items cause problems.

Five
inert/replica grenades were discovered in carry-on bags this week. Two were
discovered at Wichita (ICT), and the remainder were discovered at Las Vegas
(LAS), San Diego (SAN) and San Antonio (SAT).

Grenades Discovered at (L-R) SAT, SAN, LAS, ICT

Artfully
Concealed Prohibited Items –
It’s important to examine your bags prior to traveling to ensure no prohibited
items are inside. If a prohibited item is discovered in your bag or on your
body, you could be cited and quite possibly arrested by local law enforcement.
Here are a few examples from this week where prohibited items were found by our
officers in strange places.

A
concealed double edge knife inside a comb was discovered at San Francisco
(SFO).

Five
credit card knives were discovered this week. Two were discovered at Grand
Forks (GFK), and the remainder were discovered at Charleston (CHS), Kansas City
(MCI), and Rapid City (RAP).

Stun
Guns – 13
stun guns were discovered this week in carry-on bags around the nation. Two
were discovered at Birmingham (BHM), two more at Las Vegas (LAS), and the
remainder were discovered at Albuquerque (ABQ), Anchorage (ANC), Columbus
(CMH), Denver (DEN), Fargo (FAR), Helena (HLN), Oklahoma City (OKC), San
Francisco (SFO), and San Jose (SJC).

Ammunition Discovered at (BNA)

Ammunition – When packed
properly, ammunition can be transported in your checked luggage, but it is
never permissible to pack ammo in your carry-on bag.

Firearms
Discovered This Week in Carry-On Bags

Guns Discovered at (T-B / L-R) CPR, MSY, TPA

Guns Discovered at (L-R / T-B) SAT, DAL, CHA, FLL, CLT

*In
order to provide a timely weekly update, this data is compiled from a
preliminary report. The year-end numbers will vary slightly from what is
reported in the weekly updates. However, any monthly, midyear, or end-of-year
numbers TSA provides on this blog or elsewhere will be actual numbers and not
estimates.

Unfortunately
these sorts of occurrences are all too frequent which is why we talk about
these finds. Sure, it’s great to share the things that our officers are
finding, but at the same time, each time we find a dangerous item, the
throughput is slowed down and a passenger that likely had no ill intent ends up
with a citation or in some cases is even arrested. The passenger can face a
penalty as high as $7,500.00. This is a friendly reminder to please
leave these items at home. Just because we find a prohibited item on an
individual does not mean they had bad intentions, that's for the law
enforcement officer to decide. In many cases, people simply forgot they had
these items.

Can I stop removing my shoes now? The missing flight 370 shows so much bumbling by officials and employees worldwide that the expense for TSA USA is just a method to keep people employed and the public paranoid.

As for the post 9/11 cockpit doors we mandated, it would be a shame if they prevented passengers from gaining to the cockpit if an emergency occurred.

So was that replica grenade lighter, which you caption as an actual grenade (ANOTHER intentional mislabeling) confiscated because it contained lighter fluid or because it happened to be shaped by a grenade?

Was the passenger given the option to check the non-WEI item or ship it rather than have the govt seize his property under duress?

it appears that the tsa is providing a public service by letting people know what is not allowed at the airport. tsas duty is to stop weapons, incindiaries, and explosives from getting on a plane and it appears that they are providing examples of these items. also it appears that the tsa defines replicas of the above items as prohibited as well. i believe that all of this information available in numerous areas including at the airports.

Good job. Xray me..my computers. .cameras and anything else. Upgrade the pre check to include a microchip so I dont need the kiosk and I'll be in good shape.. I was in back of Pauly Shore at a security check a few years ago. Frightening.

Clint said...So was that replica grenade lighter, which you caption as an actual grenade (ANOTHER intentional mislabeling) confiscated because it contained lighter fluid or because it happened to be shaped by a grenade?

Was the passenger given the option to check the non-WEI item or ship it rather than have the govt seize his property under duress?

March 15, 2014 at 7:52 AM________________________________

Clint, you already know that TSA, especially the TSA Blog Team, has no respect for stating matters honestly.

Mark McDonald sez - "set up a warning area before they enter the TSA area. if they still trying bring weapons on the plane, arrest them"

Any arrest or followup for firearms possession is entirely up to the local LEOs that respond, and are accordingly based upon local firearm laws - not TSA.

Cliffontheroad sez - "As for the post 9/11 cockpit doors we mandated, it would be a shame if they prevented passengers from gaining to the cockpit if an emergency occurred."

So the most lauded security change in the wake of 9/11 is bad now? What suggestion would you have to replace this protocol?

Anon sez - "it appears that the tsa is providing a public service by letting people know what is not allowed at the airport. tsas duty is to stop weapons, incindiaries, and explosives from getting on a plane + more"

Well said.

Anon sez - "I was in back of Pauly Shore at a security check a few years ago"

He has been funny for years, although I hear he is an aquired taste in humor.

Anonymous said...rb said:"Just what is this weekly report suppose to accomplish?"it appears that the tsa is providing a public service by letting people know what is not allowed at the airport. tsas duty is to stop weapons, incindiaries, and explosives from getting on a plane and it appears that they are providing examples of these items. also it appears that the tsa defines replicas of the above items as prohibited as well. i believe that all of this information available in numerous areas including at the airports.March 15, 2014 at 8:26 AM

------------------------------I see little public service in posting a boring repeated weekly piece that doesn't cover any new ground. This TSA effort surely hasn't done anything to reduce the number of weapons and non-weapon items found each week. Perhaps the TSA Blog Team could better use their time adressing the core issue of these items getting to the airport in the first place. Or even an update on current red team testing. Would be nice to know if TSA screeners are finding more than 30% of these weapons.

Please post a blog entry about the initiative described at http://www.nextgov.com/big-data/2014/03/tsa-halts-testing-technology-screen-passengers-online-data/80065/.

The linked article says:

"...The Transportation Security Administration has called off -- for now -- live tests of technology that would expand background checks on airplane passengers to include analyses of their online presences. The idea was to have contractors analyze consumer data -- potentially including dating profiles and shopping histories -- on fliers who apply for the voluntary 'Pre✓' program..."

In your blog entry, please address privacy protections, cost-effectiveness of the initiative, and data that support the use of mass surveillance techniques in successfully identifying those who would commit acts of terror.

Week after week, you post your finds. Week after week, nothing dangerous found requires a full body scanner. These machines are slow, invasive (even with ATR they still single out people with medical conditions), expensive and, very clearly from your data, ineffective. In fact, the simple fact that they only detect stuff on the front and back surface of people indicates these machines make it EASIER for a would-be criminal to bring a gun into an airplane.

The question is, why are you still using these machines? Your data shows us, very clearly, they need to go away.

To all the spoiled individuals that continually complain about the TSA, give it up already. The threat is very real. You have been flying relatively care free since 9/11 and that is all that matters. I fly all the time and security is a minor inconvenience. I dont want to be at 35,000 feet with a lunatic with a firearm, especially after a few drinks. Besides if you are so important, spend a few bucks and get a Global Entry card for Pre Check entry.

I continue to wait for some justification for active duty military being included in pre-check, but not retired military or holders of current DoD or LE background investigations. military retirees have at least 20 years documents service to this Nation, pretty much proving their lack of risk. both DoD and LE background investigations should reveal any risk factors. active duty military do not, necessarily, have a background check or any significant length of service. neither citizenship nor a background investigation is required to enlist in the military, in fact there are likely illegal immigrants serving. if it is really about safety, then why are potentially unscreened non-citizens allowed through? sounds like it is just pandering to an admirable group to get PR, not adjusting the rules to ease screening on those who present a lower likelihood of threat.Let me be clear: pre-911 screening should be the norm. it is all that is required, now that cockpit doors have been reinforced and locked, and flight crews and passengers know that the rules have changed and passivity=death. however, if we are going to continue this massive waste of tax dollars on security theatre, at least have _some_ of the rules make sense.

Hopefully, the perfume "grenade"-like bottle confiscated from a passenger at Sky Harbor will make next week's list of dangerous and scary things found at checkpoints. Heaven forbid, the lane she was in was closed and a "bomb expert" was called to deal with a perfume bottle. Talk about looking really foolish, you did it this time TSA!

To claim, as one member of the Blog has done here recently, that to allow it could cause other passengers to construe it as a threat, is totally disingenuous. If others see it as a threat, and only the most sissified would do so, the other passengers would handle it.

With Flight MH370 still missing and unaccounted for I think it would be prudent to review if this countries security screening would have prevented such an event if crew involvement is responsible which certainly looks to be the case.

We know that TSA had absolutely nothing to do with MH370 screening. But, if crew members are involved in the taking over an aircraft would current TSA procedures be enough to stop such an attack?

Are crew members screened fully and to the same degree as passengers?

Are ground crew and other airport workers screened fully and to the same degree as passengers?

If the answer to either question is no then TSA leaves the security door wide open to having a similar incident is this country.

I'm sure you will mention replica weapons and inert grenades and the potential threat they might, theoretically pose, but the only POSSIBLE threat a replica poses is inciting panic amongst the passengers, and it must be a REALISTIC replica for that to happen.

In this case, however, that simply doesn't apply. This was not a realistic replica. This was not an inert grenade. This was not even an object that remotely resembled a grenade - it was a ROUND GLASS BOTTLE OF PERFUME.

Only the stupidest of the stupid would ever suggest that such a bottle could be construed as a replica weapon. But that's just what your TSOs at PHX said - that it was prohibited because it "resembeled" a grenade.

Well, it didn't. But they confiscated an $85 bottle of perfume from a traveler anyway.

Your agency owes this lady an apology, a replacement bottle of perfume, and a strong directive to all TSA personnel that round glass shapes do NOT look like grenades and are NOT to be stolen from travelers.

@ RB - not to mention the colorful way that West continues to cherry pick questions posted here that he can answer with a simple party line declaration, and ignore the ones that require actual thought or expose the lack of logic in TSA policies ...

Quoted:"Anonymous said... Please post a blog entry about the initiative described at http://www.nextgov.com/big-data/2014/03/tsa-halts-testing-technology-screen-passengers-online-data/80065/.

The linked article says:

"...The Transportation Security Administration has called off -- for now -- live tests of technology that would expand background checks on airplane passengers to include analyses of their online presences. The idea was to have contractors analyze consumer data -- potentially including dating profiles and shopping histories -- on fliers who apply for the voluntary 'Pre✓' program..."

In your blog entry, please address privacy protections, cost-effectiveness of the initiative, and data that support the use of mass surveillance techniques in successfully identifying those who would commit acts of terror.

Anonymous said..."@ RB - not to mention the colorful way that West continues to cherry pick questions posted here that he can answer with a simple party line declaration, and ignore the ones that require actual thought or expose the lack of logic in TSA policies ..."

This is to give the illusion of an ongoing dialog with the public. Much like the TSA gives an illusion of security to those lacking any common sense ;)

Anonymous said..."@ RB - not to mention the colorful way that West continues to cherry pick questions posted here that he can answer with a simple party line declaration, and ignore the ones that require actual thought or expose the lack of logic in TSA policies ..."

The TSAnonymous who questioned whether TSA should blog about their recent testing of searching the American public's online profiles and comments must not have read the article. The TSA has only delayed, not canceled, their plan to roll out full online profiling of Americans who want to get on a plane with a slightly less chance of being assaulted by submitting to a *full* background check, FBI fingerprinting, and paying an exhortion fee. (TSA calls it "precheck.")

Since the TSA clearly states that they can decide you aren't worthy for any reason (it does not have to be related to aviation safety), and they don't need to tell you why, this expansion of precheck to include Americans' free speech and right to be critical of any facet of life, including our government, the precheck expansion is certainly much more important than a "good catch" of a small toy gun or 2 oz perfume bottle.

Does it not bother you that TSA has spent time and taxpayer money giving serious consideration to the idea of spying on flyers' on-line shopping behavior? This is yet another indication that TSA is (a) out of touch with Constitutional/human rights, (b) continues to ignore privacy-related concerns expressed by thousands of citizens and nonprofit organizations, and (c) continues to ignore the truth about terror risk.

Regarding (a), check out the Fourth Amendment and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Regarding (b), see the 5,000+ public comments on the use of body scanners at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=TSA-2013-0004. Regarding (c), check out the statistics at http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/04/statistics-you-are-not-going-to-be-killed-by-terrorists.html, which show that (for example) you are more likely to starve to death than be killed in a terror attack. Maybe we should put TSA's billions toward combating hunger, improving highway safety, fighting cancer, etc.?

I was thinking if the perfume was in a bottle intentionally designed to look like a grenade I could care less about TSA taking it away from someone. I’m inclined to give TSA leeway if something is supposed to look like a weapon. After looking at a picture of the offending bottle in question I think my mother has glassware at home with a similar design for drinking out of. Anyone with half a brain would never be fooled into thinking a clear glass vial of light colored liquid was a grenade. So as stupid as the liquid rules are I thought well is it more than 3 ounces? No it isn’t that either. Ok so what if they dumped that out and filled it with black fluid because . . . well use your imagination!!! The passenger was TSA PreCheck so no I’m not buying the TSA logic on this one where if an inch is possible therefore it always equals a mile or more. Maybe if the passenger wasn’t PreCheck and/or wasn’t a US citizen I could somehow see this is out of an extreme abundance of caution suggesting it should be checked. It still looks like it is in the pinky sized sock puppet tiny toy gun range of the absurd to me though. Especially since it appears the overkill call the bomb squad option was the first response.

I would suggest to the passenger since she’s experienced confusion over the item in the past and now overkill on it that perhaps she should put the perfume in a more non descript vial for her future travels. There are stupid absurd things I shouldn’t have to do either when I fly like buy travel size toothpaste that always run out before I get home. I do it anyway because it is cheaper than checking a bag just for that or buying more if TSA spots the full size tube. Putting it in another vial is stupid but cheaper than buying another bottle.

When the TSA errs in the side f caution, it does so millions of times, to millions of people. The sum of the damage caused by all these small errs is infinitely higher than the gains from the TSA (which has never caught a terrorist).